Time to piss off some people. American society has never been progressive on rape. Hell 20 years ago Date rape was labeled "hey let's get drunk and laid tonight." As horrible as the initial stories sounded, I was worried when it came out all three were drunk and she was "drunk" or "unconscious" when the rape occurred.

I believe she was raped 100%, but the not guilty doesn't surprise me one bit.

Time to piss off some people. American society has never been progressive on rape. Hell 20 years ago Date rape was labeled "hey let's get drunk and laid tonight." As horrible as the initial stories sounded, I was worried when it came out all three were drunk and she was "drunk" or "unconscious" when the rape occurred.

I believe she was raped 100%, but the not guilty doesn't surprise me one bit.

I've been to many a "let's get drunk and screw" night at various bars, pubs, and nightclubs (and private parties) where the guys pick a bolt or machine screw at random from one box, and the gals pick a nut.

Its so common there's even a name for it -- jury nullification. Therein lies the main problem with our system of trial by jury. Just ask the families of Nicole Simpson and Ronald Goldman.

I believe it was more in line, after reading Georgette's write ups, that it was too difficult to prove that consent was NOT GIVEN for the sexual acts, and the way you view the video tape, as fucked, sick, and disgusting as it is is framed by the idea of [Consent Given/Consent Not Given], and this was not able to be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Good lawyers be good. :(

They were not "without guilt", but they are "without guilt beyond reasonable doubt" (this doesn't mean anything, but makes me feel a bit better inside...).

I believe it was more in line, after reading Georgette's write ups, that it was too difficult to prove that consent was NOT GIVEN for the sexual acts, and the way you view the video tape, as fucked, sick, and disgusting as it is is framed by the idea of [Consent Given/Consent Not Given], and this was not able to be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Good lawyers be good. :(

They were not "without guilt", but they are "without guilt beyond reasonable doubt" (this doesn't mean anything, but makes me feel a bit better inside...).

I agree that the verdict would mean only that there was reasonable doubt about guilt.
But, the prosecution didn't have to start out proving that there was no consent. Consent is a defense, and the defendant has the burden in his case to prove that the victim consented. Then its up to the prosecution if they want to rebut the defense, or just rely on their own case. Either the defense raised sufficient reasonable doubt with its showing of proof, or the U.S. Attorney did a bad job in rebuttal, or both.

Tho I'm still not convinced that nullification was not a factor, given the facts involving intoxication and sexual conduct, but we'll probably never know.

Georgette's has a few items of write up, all of them pretty interesting, and interesting as well to see the comments, some of them pretty foul, after the fact of the court decision: http://georgetteoden.blogspot.com.au/

Also her comments from the 6th Nov :( , my emphasis added:

"Jury hangs on remaining misdemeanors, Schultz granted a mistrial.
The jury came back hung (couldn't agree) and so the court declared a mistrial. The case has been continued so that the prosecution can decide how it wants to proceed.

Don't freak out, don't jump to conclusions. Take a deep breath and let's think about how best to see positive change come out of this. I'll be in touch."

Georgette's has a few items of write up, all of them pretty interesting, and interesting as well to see the comments, some of them pretty foul, after the fact of the court decision: http://georgetteoden.blogspot.com.au/

Also her comments from the 6th Nov :( , my emphasis added:

"Jury hangs on remaining misdemeanors, Schultz granted a mistrial.
The jury came back hung (couldn't agree) and so the court declared a mistrial. The case has been continued so that the prosecution can decide how it wants to proceed.

Don't freak out, don't jump to conclusions. Take a deep breath and let's think about how best to see positive change come out of this. I'll be in touch."

I just want to get some clarification. I am looking at a bjj school near me in Maryland and found a very attractive school called crazy88. I heard that the affiliate program is terminated but at the same time they still seem to rep lloyd Irvin. any information as I don't feel comfortable associating with this and would rather find another school even if more expensive and not as successful.

My instructor got his start there. That is an absoloute top notch program. His isntructors name was Julius who I beleive is the owner.

I just want to get some clarification. I am looking at a bjj school near me in Maryland and found a very attractive school called crazy88. I heard that the affiliate program is terminated but at the same time they still seem to rep lloyd Irvin. any information as I don't feel comfortable associating with this and would rather find another school even if more expensive and not as successful.

Although the affiliate program was "terminated," IIRC the Crazy 88 competitors competed under "Team Lloyd Irvin" during the worlds this year.